Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Livestock Facility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House reconsiders Northeast Mississippi livestock show bill after Mississippi State says it needs the facility for research
Summary
Members debated Senate Bill 2637, which removes a reverse repealer on use of the Northeast Mississippi Livestock facility; representatives pressed for documentation that the site is unsuitable for livestock shows, and a motion to recommit with instructions to restore a two‑year repealer passed by voice vote.
The House debated Senate Bill 2637, a conference report concerning the Northeast Mississippi Livestock facility, after members said Mississippi State University intends to use the site for research and marketing rather than for livestock events.
Representative Thompson, speaking for members in the northeast district, said he had not been shown documentation proving the facility is unsuitable for livestock shows. “Can you provide me the documentation that it is not suitable?” he asked, urging the conferees to share Mississippi State’s findings.
Supporters of the Senate’s revisions said Mississippi State told conferees the facility is being used for sweet potato research and marketing and that it lacks adequate water and electricity for shows. A House member pressed that the county no longer owns the facility, and that the university’s research needs informed the change.
The disagreement centered on the removal of a two‑year reverse repealer that had been in earlier versions of the bill. Representative (Holmes County), who moved to recommit the conference report, argued the repealer would have required a legislative revisit in two years and offered local representatives an opportunity for follow‑up. “I’m going to ask you to please, please vote to recommit this bill with a specific instruction to just simply put the two‑year repealer back again,” he said, urging colleagues that the change would not harm the bill but would preserve oversight.
Several members spoke in favor of recommitting to allow time for the parties to work together on improvements; others said Mississippi State’s ownership and operational plans justified the change. The motion to recommit with the instruction to restore the two‑year repealer was put and, by the chair’s announcement, carried by voice vote.
As of the end of the floor debate recorded in the transcript, the bill had been recommitted for further consideration with instructions to restore the two‑year reverse repealer; no final passage vote on the conference report was recorded in the provided transcript.
